Falling somewhere between rom-com and break-up drama, a recent crop of films test the nature of matrimony—and show how ideas about infidelity and divorce have changed

Warner Bros

Steve Carrell has a fine moment of pure swagger in this past summer's Crazy Stupid Love. His character, a swept-together professional named Cal
Weaver, has endured the disclosure of infidelity by his wife Emily (Julianne Moore) and her request for a divorce, the confusion and indifference of
his children, and a high-rent makeover by pickup artist Jacob Palmer (Ryan Gosling). After a blundering introduction to the singles' scene, he finally
lands his killer line—"You're the perfect combination of cute and sexy"—on a teacher (Marisa Tomei) and takes her to his bachelor apartment. The next
night, the doors of the bar open on a smiling, laughing, confident Cal, in slow motion, settling in for a montage of effortless seduction. Not quite
married and not quite divorced, Cal Weaver becomes a joyful advertisement for taking a break from marriage.

In the old
movies, characters needed forgiveness. In the new movies, they need permission.

Crazy Stupid Love
exemplifies the growing genre of marriage-crisis movies, stories pitched between the winking optimism of the romantic comedy and the somber twilight of
the divorce melodrama. In movies as varied as Hall Pass and The Kids Are All Right, as well as classics like The Grass is Greener
(1960) and Two for the Road (1967), we meet the characters years or decades after ice-cream dates, meet-cute ER visits, and wedding photos have
given way to domestic struggles and sexual frustration. Since these films all rely on nods of recognition from the audience,
they must attempt to depict married life in realistic terms. To trace the genre's evolution over the years is to trace the evolution of American
attitudes toward partnership, divorce, and adultery.

In Crazy Stupid Love, marriage is depriving us of sex and high culture. While Cal is cutting a swathe through the L.A. nightlife, Emily dines
chastely with her sometime other man (Kevin Bacon), who promises to finally fulfill her girlhood dream of going to the ballet. The parenthesis in Cal and Emily's
marriage grants each of them the chance to live their long-thwarted fantasies. Wish-fulfillment, and the sabbatical from marriage vows that enables it,
is also at the heart of Hall Pass. Maggie and Grace (Jenna Fischer and Christina Applegate) fret over the crude behavior of their husbands Rick
and Frank (Owen Wilson and Jason Sudeikis). Their doctor friend (played by Joy Behar) proposes the film's eponymous arrangement: a week off from
marriage. "Remove the taboo and you remove the obsession," Behar tells them, and after all, she's a professional. Soon the wives are out of town and
chugging beers with unsuitable men (no ballet tickets for them). Rick and Frank spend a week trying to relive their single days.

This casually provocative premise is taped up around the sort of scatological and masturbatory set-pieces for which the film's directors, the Farrelly
brothers, are known (you have not known nostalgia for the old Hays Code until you've seen a grown man defecate in a sand bunker). But in its own
foul-mouth way, Hall Pass painstakingly establishes the grounds for a week of marriage. Crazy Stupid Love, on the other hand, drops
divorce on the audience in the first 30 seconds Why is it that a "hall pass" should seem like a more risqué plot device than the looming end of a
decades-long marriage? Perhaps audiences have become acclimated to the idea of divorce, on-screen and off, while even just a week of open marriage is
still cloaked in stigma. But the effect is the same either way: The pent-up disappointments of married life are allowed time for mending by virtue of
some explicit exception.

While audiences are invited to identify with Emily's longing for the ballet in CrazyStupid Love or with the priapic man-children of Hall Pass, the troubles that bedevil cinematic marriages don't need obvious gender stereotypes to hit home. In The Kids Are All Right
(2010), Moore stars as Jules (this genre has been keeping Moore in steady work since 2002's Far From Heaven), an aspiring gardener raising a son
and daughter with Nic (Annette Bening). The kids stir up trouble by making contact with their biological father Paul (Mark Ruffalo). Where Crazy begins with the divorce bombshell and Hall Pass with a treatise on male leering, The Kids Are All Right opts for a lighter
touch. Jules and Nic are simply trying to manage their children's academic and social lives as they move through high school ("Mom, you're
windshield-wipering," their son tells Jules as she searchingly strokes his forearm). The touching, funny, and ultimately painful scene establishing
their disappointing sexual connection is so emotionally versatile that it didn't necessarily have to foreshadow adultery.

Yet the adultery comes, courtesy of Paul, his garden, and his own delayed curiosity about love and family. And despite the progressive setting—Joni
Mitchell on the stereo, a kid named Laser, organic food, lots of wine—there is no hall pass and no trial separation on offer here. There's only
attempted home-wrecking, anger, and sleeping on the couch. The violent emotional tone of the film's last act distinguishes it from the more easy-going Crazy and Hall Pass. Yet the film is less different than it seems. All three movies take a brittle, wounded, proprietary attitude toward
sexual fidelity. Cal is stunned that a woman who's had one sexual partner her whole life might stray; Maggie and Grace are disgusted at the antics of
their undersexed mates; Nic is hot with betrayal at the fact that her wife is attracted to the father of their children. In two cases a formal
exception is made, and in the third it isn't.

This attitude toward adultery departs from the classics of the genre. The Grass is Greener found an American millionaire (Robert Mitchum)
trespassing on the property and affections of a lady of Britain's lower aristocracy (Deborah Kerr). Soon she joins him in London on a transparent
pretext, without any objection from her knowing husband (Cary Grant). Asked why he didn't stop her from seeing him again, Grant's Lord Rhyall explains,
"If she hadn't, I'd have been the obstacle preventing her from seeing him again, and that would have damaged our relationship, even at the cost of
encouraging theirs." It's the Hall Pass scenario, but with silent toleration rather than explicit permission as the hinge on which the action
swings. "A spoken word, like a lost opportunity, does not come back," Rhyall's friend advises. It's advice that might have been profitably heeded by
the characters in the more recent films.

When Grant's scheme to win his own wife back becomes revealed, they sit down for one of the great marriage-saving scenes in film. "If your mistress is
unfaithful, she should be discarded," Grant pronounces. "If your wife is unfaithful, she should be befriended." "Meaning helped and patronized?" Kerr
rebuffs. "Loved and cherished," Grant explains.

Likewise, when Audrey Hepburn and Albert Finney cheat on each other in Two for the Road (1967), it's a painful but not shocking development.
Both films take the somewhat old-fashioned view that adultery is a part of marriage rather than an interruption of it. Their characters meet it with
more patience and dignity than any of the grieved spouses in the recent films. Divorce is an option in the older films, but a grim and even tragic one.
In Crazy, on the other hand, Cal's co-worker roars with relief when he hears that Cal is only going through a divorce and not cancer. In the old
movies, characters needed forgiveness, or at least indulgence for their wanderings. In the new movies, they need permission. And in the older movies,
forgiveness was enough for a fresh start. In the new films, someone has to be punished. Cal's moment of glory, and the audience's chance to eat and
have its cake, fades as he suffers a public humiliation. The characters in Hall Pass and The Kids Are All Right who act on their entirely
plausible desires, have to pay for it somehow before their second chances. These films are telling us that marriage has become more, rather than less,
rigid, both emotionally and sexually.

Yet all of these films—old and new, raunchy and restrained, comedic or serious-as-death-and-Blue—end up in essentially the same place. Moviegoers
have never been averse to peeking a little ways down the road not taken, however the characters may suffer for doing it on our behalf. This seems to be
an enduring feature of modern marriage. But we remain infatuated with the hope that, by whatever means it takes, the road not taken leads to the same
place: happily ever after, more or less.

Most Popular

His paranoid style paved the road for Trumpism. Now he fears what’s been unleashed.

Glenn Beck looks like the dad in a Disney movie. He’s earnest, geeky, pink, and slightly bulbous. His idea of salty language is bullcrap.

The atmosphere at Beck’s Mercury Studios, outside Dallas, is similarly soothing, provided you ignore the references to genocide and civilizational collapse. In October, when most commentators considered a Donald Trump presidency a remote possibility, I followed audience members onto the set of The Glenn Beck Program, which airs on Beck’s website, theblaze.com. On the way, we passed through a life-size replica of the Oval Office as it might look if inhabited by a President Beck, complete with a portrait of Ronald Reagan and a large Norman Rockwell print of a Boy Scout.

Should you drink more coffee? Should you take melatonin? Can you train yourself to need less sleep? A physician’s guide to sleep in a stressful age.

During residency, Iworked hospital shifts that could last 36 hours, without sleep, often without breaks of more than a few minutes. Even writing this now, it sounds to me like I’m bragging or laying claim to some fortitude of character. I can’t think of another type of self-injury that might be similarly lauded, except maybe binge drinking. Technically the shifts were 30 hours, the mandatory limit imposed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, but we stayed longer because people kept getting sick. Being a doctor is supposed to be about putting other people’s needs before your own. Our job was to power through.

The shifts usually felt shorter than they were, because they were so hectic. There was always a new patient in the emergency room who needed to be admitted, or a staff member on the eighth floor (which was full of late-stage terminally ill people) who needed me to fill out a death certificate. Sleep deprivation manifested as bouts of anger and despair mixed in with some euphoria, along with other sensations I’ve not had before or since. I remember once sitting with the family of a patient in critical condition, discussing an advance directive—the terms defining what the patient would want done were his heart to stop, which seemed likely to happen at any minute. Would he want to have chest compressions, electrical shocks, a breathing tube? In the middle of this, I had to look straight down at the chart in my lap, because I was laughing. This was the least funny scenario possible. I was experiencing a physical reaction unrelated to anything I knew to be happening in my mind. There is a type of seizure, called a gelastic seizure, during which the seizing person appears to be laughing—but I don’t think that was it. I think it was plain old delirium. It was mortifying, though no one seemed to notice.

Why did Trump’s choice for national-security advisor perform so well in the war on terror, only to find himself forced out of the Defense Intelligence Agency?

How does a man like retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn—who spent his life sifting through information and parsing reports, separating rumor and innuendo from actionable intelligence—come to promote conspiracy theories on social media?

Perhaps it’s less Flynn who’s changed than that the circumstances in which he finds himself—thriving in some roles, and flailing in others.

In diagnostic testing, there’s a basic distinction between sensitivity, or the ability to identify positive results, and specificity, the ability to exclude negative ones. A test with high specificity may avoid generating false positives, but at the price of missing many diagnoses. One with high sensitivity may catch those tricky diagnoses, but also generate false positives along the way. Some people seem to sift through information with high sensitivity, but low specificity—spotting connections that others can’t, and perhaps some that aren’t even there.

“Well, you’re just special. You’re American,” remarked my colleague, smirking from across the coffee table. My other Finnish coworkers, from the school in Helsinki where I teach, nodded in agreement. They had just finished critiquing one of my habits, and they could see that I was on the defensive.

I threw my hands up and snapped, “You’re accusing me of being too friendly? Is that really such a bad thing?”

“Well, when I greet a colleague, I keep track,” she retorted, “so I don’t greet them again during the day!” Another chimed in, “That’s the same for me, too!”

Unbelievable, I thought. According to them, I’m too generous with my hellos.

When I told them I would do my best to greet them just once every day, they told me not to change my ways. They said they understood me. But the thing is, now that I’ve viewed myself from their perspective, I’m not sure I want to remain the same. Change isn’t a bad thing. And since moving to Finland two years ago, I’ve kicked a few bad American habits.

Why the ingrained expectation that women should desire to become parents is unhealthy

In 2008, Nebraska decriminalized child abandonment. The move was part of a "safe haven" law designed to address increased rates of infanticide in the state. Like other safe-haven laws, parents in Nebraska who felt unprepared to care for their babies could drop them off in a designated location without fear of arrest and prosecution. But legislators made a major logistical error: They failed to implement an age limitation for dropped-off children.

Within just weeks of the law passing, parents started dropping off their kids. But here's the rub: None of them were infants. A couple of months in, 36 children had been left in state hospitals and police stations. Twenty-two of the children were over 13 years old. A 51-year-old grandmother dropped off a 12-year-old boy. One father dropped off his entire family -- nine children from ages one to 17. Others drove from neighboring states to drop off their children once they heard that they could abandon them without repercussion.

Democrats who have struggled for years to sell the public on the Affordable Care Act are now confronting a far more urgent task: mobilizing a political coalition to save it.

Even as the party reels from last month’s election defeat, members of Congress, operatives, and liberal allies have turned to plotting a campaign against repealing the law that, they hope, will rival the Tea Party uprising of 2009 that nearly scuttled its passage in the first place. A group of progressive advocacy groups will announce on Friday a coordinated effort to protect the beneficiaries of the Affordable Care Act and stop Republicans from repealing the law without first identifying a plan to replace it.

They don’t have much time to fight back. Republicans on Capitol Hill plan to set repeal of Obamacare in motion as soon as the new Congress opens in January, and both the House and Senate could vote to wind down the law immediately after President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office on the 20th.

Trinidad has the highest rate of Islamic State recruitment in the Western hemisphere. How did this happen?

This summer, the so-called Islamic State published issue 15 of its online magazine Dabiq. In what has become a standard feature, it ran an interview with an ISIS foreign fighter. “When I was around twenty years old I would come to accept the religion of truth, Islam,” said Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi, recalling how he had turned away from the Christian faith he was born into.

At-Trinidadi, as his nom de guerre suggests, is from the Caribbean island of Trinidad and Tobago (T&T), a country more readily associated with calypso and carnival than the “caliphate.” Asked if he had a message for “the Muslims of Trinidad,” he condemned his co-religionists at home for remaining in “a place where you have no honor and are forced to live in humiliation, subjugated by the disbelievers.” More chillingly, he urged Muslims in T&T to wage jihad against their fellow citizens: “Terrify the disbelievers in their own homes and make their streets run with their blood.”

A professor of cognitive science argues that the world is nothing like the one we experience through our senses.

As we go about our daily lives, we tend to assume that our perceptions—sights, sounds, textures, tastes—are an accurate portrayal of the real world. Sure, when we stop and think about it—or when we find ourselves fooled by a perceptual illusion—we realize with a jolt that what we perceive is never the world directly, but rather our brain’s best guess at what that world is like, a kind of internal simulation of an external reality. Still, we bank on the fact that our simulation is a reasonably decent one. If it wasn’t, wouldn’t evolution have weeded us out by now? The true reality might be forever beyond our reach, but surely our senses give us at least an inkling of what it’s really like.

The same part of the brain that allows us to step into the shoes of others also helps us restrain ourselves.

You’ve likely seen the video before: a stream of kids, confronted with a single, alluring marshmallow. If they can resist eating it for 15 minutes, they’ll get two. Some do. Others cave almost immediately.

This “Marshmallow Test,” first conducted in the 1960s, perfectly illustrates the ongoing war between impulsivity and self-control. The kids have to tamp down their immediate desires and focus on long-term goals—an ability that correlates with their later health, wealth, and academic success, and that is supposedly controlled by the front part of the brain. But a new study by Alexander Soutschek at the University of Zurich suggests that self-control is also influenced by another brain region—and one that casts this ability in a different light.

A new survey suggests many might prefer a kind of multipolar Washington, with three distinct orbits of power checking each other.

Does Donald Trump have a mandate?

Though last month’s election provided Trump and his fellow Republicans unified control of the White House, House of Representatives, and Senate for the first time since 2006, the latest Allstate/Atlantic Media Heartland Monitor Poll shows the country remains closely split on many of the key policy challenges facing the incoming administration—and sharply divided on whether they trust the next president to take the lead in responding to them.

In addition, on several important choices facing the new administration and Congress, the survey found that respondents who voted for Trump supported a position that was rejected by the majority of adults overall. That contrast may simultaneously encourage Trump to press forward on an agenda that energizes his coalition, while emboldening congressional Democrats to resist him.